I think Hoover is the Republican Jimmy Carter: Dems love to rip him because they know Republicans have a hard time defending someone who's so unpopular.
He oversaw a tax hike on corporations and stricter control of Wall Street that is until today unprecedented. He just happened to be president at a bad time, not to mention the fact that he didn't know who his real "Daddy" was, so he got creamed - just like Carter. Today's pols know who there Daddy is. Read: The Bailout.
GOPers voted against it not because they wanted to show how they weren't in lock step with their president, or that they were in close races and were afraid to piss off their constituencies. Sure, some would like to be able to make that point, but can only site 18 of 21 Republicans in tough fights who voted against it. What about the others?
No, they voted it down because the Dems tried to take away the CEO's children's piggy banks, paltry limits though they were. For the same reason, Dems thought they'd come off as being some kind of friggin' heroes. Paltry heroes.
But they failed. So back to the drawing board, eh?
The bill that ends up being passed will be worse. Why would the Dems vote for it? See the senator from Illinois' excuse for his vote on FISA. They don't care, they just wanna look good for Daddy. If you don't believe me, explain this:
Section 107. Contracting Procedures.
Allows the Secretary to waive provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation where compelling circumstances make compliance contrary to the public interest.
Still don't believe me, I got a trade deal for ya.
It's hard to look good for your financial backers and your constituency at the same time. For Republicans it's a little bit easier, because their voters are stupid. The Democratic Party - savvy as they are - got the Liberal label because they are better at coddling and screwing at the same time.
When it comes to hating anything the other side proposes, your average dyed-in-the-wool Dem-voter is just as bad as the loud and proud red-staters. They are so blind, they'd follow their Dem heroes over any cliff and into any river. Hey, let's pretend we're Butch and Sundance!
So now the Democratic leadership are further out front on the bailout than their counterparts. It's gotta get done (with proper protection, reforms, limits, oversights, enter your own buzzword here and you, too, could become a representative with a great big "D" after your name).
Not to go forward would be a catatrophe, say our paltry heroes, and if you don't believe us, you're either sadly mistaken (we don't want to offend you), naive (these things are complicated), or radicals (fuck you! you are sadly mistaken and naive).
In the spirit of bipartisanship, we're told, the lawmakers hammered together a deal which made improvements on the legislation they'd received. With the understanding - according to the house speaker - that both parties would sacrifice (my word) half of their votes.
When the legislation came to the floor for a vote, "the Democratic side more than lived up to its side of the bargain," she said. The bargain! Poor choice of words at least. She even repeated the phrasing.
It's a fucking bargain! "The crisis is still with us." she went on. So if the bill had passed, the crisis would be over.
And on: "We need protection." So it's protection money is it? And on, "Rep. Frank has great knowledge of the subject, a great intellect to deal with the challenges..."
Oh yeah? I guess they mean this kind of deal:
Outgoing executives awarded severance packages more than three times their salary would be forced to to pay a 20 percent excise tax on the money.
Explain how that's the end of the golden parachute. Some bargain!
The congresswoman from California doesn't have any idea what matters are most urgent. She doesn't do anything except insure that the Supreme Court-nominated holder of the Office of the US Presidency remains safe from impeachment, and moreover, she does all of his heavy lifting.
To wit:
Alarm bells didn't begin to sound in The House until Paulson did his Colin Powell routine.
But I have a much better bailout bargain: How about we just cancel everyone's debts and start anew? Then, we can take that trillion dollars - which isn't real anyway - and invest in a surreal future...
But what do I know? I'm just a naive little nobody without the wisdom of a Nancy Puh-leesee or a Barney Frank. Did you hear what he said 'bout the 'Pugs? He's awesome!
He oversaw a tax hike on corporations and stricter control of Wall Street that is until today unprecedented. He just happened to be president at a bad time, not to mention the fact that he didn't know who his real "Daddy" was, so he got creamed - just like Carter. Today's pols know who there Daddy is. Read: The Bailout.
GOPers voted against it not because they wanted to show how they weren't in lock step with their president, or that they were in close races and were afraid to piss off their constituencies. Sure, some would like to be able to make that point, but can only site 18 of 21 Republicans in tough fights who voted against it. What about the others?
No, they voted it down because the Dems tried to take away the CEO's children's piggy banks, paltry limits though they were. For the same reason, Dems thought they'd come off as being some kind of friggin' heroes. Paltry heroes.
But they failed. So back to the drawing board, eh?
The bill that ends up being passed will be worse. Why would the Dems vote for it? See the senator from Illinois' excuse for his vote on FISA. They don't care, they just wanna look good for Daddy. If you don't believe me, explain this:
Section 107. Contracting Procedures.
Allows the Secretary to waive provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation where compelling circumstances make compliance contrary to the public interest.
Still don't believe me, I got a trade deal for ya.
It's hard to look good for your financial backers and your constituency at the same time. For Republicans it's a little bit easier, because their voters are stupid. The Democratic Party - savvy as they are - got the Liberal label because they are better at coddling and screwing at the same time.
When it comes to hating anything the other side proposes, your average dyed-in-the-wool Dem-voter is just as bad as the loud and proud red-staters. They are so blind, they'd follow their Dem heroes over any cliff and into any river. Hey, let's pretend we're Butch and Sundance!
So now the Democratic leadership are further out front on the bailout than their counterparts. It's gotta get done (with proper protection, reforms, limits, oversights, enter your own buzzword here and you, too, could become a representative with a great big "D" after your name).
Not to go forward would be a catatrophe, say our paltry heroes, and if you don't believe us, you're either sadly mistaken (we don't want to offend you), naive (these things are complicated), or radicals (fuck you! you are sadly mistaken and naive).
In the spirit of bipartisanship, we're told, the lawmakers hammered together a deal which made improvements on the legislation they'd received. With the understanding - according to the house speaker - that both parties would sacrifice (my word) half of their votes.
When the legislation came to the floor for a vote, "the Democratic side more than lived up to its side of the bargain," she said. The bargain! Poor choice of words at least. She even repeated the phrasing.
It's a fucking bargain! "The crisis is still with us." she went on. So if the bill had passed, the crisis would be over.
And on: "We need protection." So it's protection money is it? And on, "Rep. Frank has great knowledge of the subject, a great intellect to deal with the challenges..."
Oh yeah? I guess they mean this kind of deal:
Outgoing executives awarded severance packages more than three times their salary would be forced to to pay a 20 percent excise tax on the money.
Explain how that's the end of the golden parachute. Some bargain!
The congresswoman from California doesn't have any idea what matters are most urgent. She doesn't do anything except insure that the Supreme Court-nominated holder of the Office of the US Presidency remains safe from impeachment, and moreover, she does all of his heavy lifting.
To wit:
Alarm bells didn't begin to sound in The House until Paulson did his Colin Powell routine.
But I have a much better bailout bargain: How about we just cancel everyone's debts and start anew? Then, we can take that trillion dollars - which isn't real anyway - and invest in a surreal future...
But what do I know? I'm just a naive little nobody without the wisdom of a Nancy Puh-leesee or a Barney Frank. Did you hear what he said 'bout the 'Pugs? He's awesome!
